These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.

Email CommentIgnore CommenterFollow Commenter

Search TextCase SensitiveExact WordsInclude Comments

List of Bookmarks

As the genocidal horrors in Myanmar unfold, I am kicking myself for having risked my skin to go see then sainted leader, Aung San Suu Kyi.

This event occurred in Rangoon (now Yangon) in 1996 when Suu Kyi was the revered democratic opposition leader resisting the nation’s brutal military regime. The western media loved her, as it always does third world female politicians fighting dictatorships and thugs. The saintly Suu Kyi was even given a Nobel Prize by Sweden’s always giddy liberals.

To get to Suu Kyi’s compound in suburban Rangoon, I rented a car and a terrific driver named Mr. Alexander, and we wove our way through many police checkpoints, risking arrest at each one. Somehow we managed to get to her compound to hear the famous lady speak. She looked very lovely and fragile.

Like my fellow journalists, I felt great sympathy for her. Unlike them, I wondered how, if she ever came to power, this frail, bird-like creature could hold together wild and crazy Burma, a turbulent nation of 43 million that is a stew of scores of angry ethnic groups and religions – a sort of Asian Yugoslavia. As I feared back then, she was proven unfit for this heavy task.

Once rich Burma was bankrupted and dirt poor after many years of dictatorial rule by eccentric army general Ne Win who terrorized his people and practiced necromancy, other black arts and socialism. Gen. Win used the large Burmese Army to battle the nation’s many ethnic secessionists: Shan, Karen, Mon, Wa, Chinese. He persecuted the Rohingya Muslims of Rakhine state.

Ne Win was finally kicked upstairs by younger army generals. They continued the brutal dictatorship and repression of Rakhine’s Muslims, 4% of the population, who were ethnically linked to the Bengalis of neighboring Bangladesh. In fact, Burma has been oppressing and dispossessing the Rakhine Muslims for decades – it’s just that no one outside Burma paid any attention. Burma’s majority Buddhists, 87% of the population, and their powerful monkish clergy, wanted a state without Muslims.

The western powers imposed heavy economic sanctions on Burma that left it isolated and stuck in a time warp of the 1940’s. Finally, Burma’s ruling military junta wised up and put Suu Kyi in de facto power, backed by then US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. This was Clinton’s biggest mistake before the murder of Libya’s Col. Khadaffi.

The western critics of Burma fell silent and the punishing western economic boycott ended. Foreign cash flowed in. Nobel Prize winner Suu Kyi made nice speeches and won accolades abroad.

But the military still ruled. Burma’s dour, unsmiling generals remained in charge of everything important, including the lucrative timber and emerald trade, while Suu Kyi was left to make nice speeches about democracy. She, apparently, agreed to this Faustian deal.

ORDER IT NOW

Meanwhile, Burma’s army struck the Muslim Rohingya of Rakhine. In a long-planned offensive, their villages were burned to the ground and their women gang raped by Burmese soldiers. Ten thousand Muslims are reported killed, and 710,000 fled into neighboring Bangladesh where they now subsist in primitive camps. UN observers have reported this was ‘a textbook example of ethnic cleansing – the 2017 version.’

Rakhine’s Muslims where among the most wretched people on earth even before ethnic terrorism began. No one had helped them except UN aid agencies. Suu Kyi has done next to nothing to protect them or stop the genocide. She simply can’t admit that she is a powerless figurehead run by the generals. The saintly lady has been revealed to be a sock puppet.

China, which has great strategic interest in Burma as a gateway to the Indian Ocean from its western region, is a long-time backer of the Burmese military junta. It can thwart any action thanks to its seat on the UN Security – the same way the US protects Israel at the UN from censure and war crimes charges.

The nation that could have helped the Rohingyas, Saudi Arabia, self-proclaimed Defender of Islam, was too busy killing Yemeni Muslims and destroying Syria to take any notice. The Koran enjoins Muslims to help their co-religionists in distress or peril, but the obscenely rich Saudis ignored pleas to help the oppressed Rohingyas, just as they shunned pleas of help from the Muslims of Bosnia whose women were being raped and murdered.

China, which is busy trying to crush the life and religion out of its own Uighur Muslims, is encouraging ally Burma. The generals in Rangoon know they have carte blanche to commit more crimes.

(Republished from EricMargolis.com by permission of author or representative)

Seems a little off target. Aung San Suu Kyi was foisted on Burma by the US and the West and has proved an embarrassment, a lightweight.

And China–though it does have great strategic interest in Burma as a gateway to the Indian Ocean from its western region–is not a long-time backer of the Burmese military junta. China is a scrupulous practitioner of non-interference. That’s it.

Nor is China trying to crush the life and religion out of its own Uighur Muslims, nor encouraging ally Burma. Every nation on earth with a Muslim minority contains Wahabbi and other agents and sympathizers with violent sectarian records. Those in China a doubly cursed because a Uyghur emigre group based in Bethesda, MD and funded by the US Government give moral and financial support to a group of whackos called the East Turkestan Islamic Movement who have massacred hundreds of Chinese civilians.

Religionists (under 5% of Chinese) are tolerated, but they must bear in mind what nightmares they have created for China in the past. As the Yongzheng Emperor[1] explained in 1724 to Dominique Parennin, a French Jesuit missionary who requested permission to proselytize:

You say that your law is not a false law, 非左道, and We believe you. If We thought that it was false what would have held Us back from razing your churches and expelling you from the empire? False laws are those which, on the pretext of teaching virtue, fan the spirit of revolt, as is the case with the White Lotus[2] Teaching.

What would you say if We were to dispatch a group of monks and lamas to your country to preach their doctrines? How would they be received? Your Matteo Ricci came to China in the 1572 and We will not discuss what China did then did since We are not responsible for that. Then you were but few in number and it hardly mattered and you did not have your people and churches in every province. It was only under the reign of my father that you began to build churches everywhere and that your doctrines started spreading rapidly. We observed this, but we said nothing.

You may have known how to deceive Our Father, but don’t think you can deceive Us in the same way. You wish to make the Chinese all Christians and this is what your law demands. We know this very well. But in this case what would become of Us? Should We not soon become merely the subjects of your kings? The converts you have made already recognize nobody but you and, in troubled times, they would listen to no other voice than yours. We know that at present We have nothing to fear but, when foreign ships start coming in their thousands and tens of thousands, maybe serious disorders will arise.

Under the Emperor’s great-grandson a Christian uprising killed thirty-million citizens and weakened the empire to the point of collapse. Since then, whenever evidence-based secular principles and religious beliefs diverged, secular principles and laws take precedence and public proselytizing and forcing others, including children, to worship are forbidden. Otherwise, people are free to practice their religion privately. The country hosts Buddhism, Taoism, Islam, Protestantism, Ancient Chinese Religion and Catholicism and supports seventy-four seminaries, three thousand religious organizations, 85,000 religious sites and 300,000 full time clergy.

A little re-education is a small price to pay.

￼
[1] ‘Yongzheng’s Conundrum. The Emperor on Christianity, Religions, and Heterodoxy’, Menegon. An Emperor Confronts Christianity and the Heterodox, Part II: Eugenio Menegon on Qing emperor Shizong 世宗 (Aisin Gioro Injen), generally known by his reign title Yongzheng (雍正 hūwaliyasun tob, r.1722-1735).
[2] A revolutionary secret society founded in the 14th century.

Muslims in Myanmar (It’s called Myanmar, the name “Burma” is a relic of colonial era, which ended decades ago) are not natives, they are mostly immigrants from the neighbouring Bangladesh.

As far as I’m concerned Myanmar is doing everything right. Let’s not forget how conflict in Kosovo started: it started with “peaceful” migration of Muslim Albanians into Serbian province. Once the Muslims were close to a majority in the area, terrorist attacks started. Next stage was an armed jihadi insurgency, and finally “humanitarian intervention” by NATO in support of jihadists that ended up carving up the country.

Myanmar’s Muslim problem was already in a stage of jihadist terrorism, it was best not to wait until NATO intervention.

First, driving past roadblocks, while at times unsettling, was not as dangerous as Eric leads one to believe. If one was almost getting arrested, then one had no business on the roads passing by roadblocks. My guess is that Eric was more unnerved with the roadblock than he was ever in danger of arrest. However, it’s a nice touch and adds some urgency to the article. Still, in 1996 it must have been very weird to be in Rangoon. Cudo’s to you Eric. Now if you’re interested in some truth in Burma, contact me about Christopher Gunnes’s stories from 1988 on the rape of women at the hands of police that helped to ignite the uprising called, “8.8.88”.

Second, I’d met Suu Kyi at least seven times from the day she was released from House Arrest to the onslaught of the world’s elitists who showered her with awards, prizes, money, trophies, plaques, keys to cities, and all other manner of ways to court the planets last non-violent, mythical giant on par with Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, or Mother Theresa. I fact, I got to know her well during that time and I can assure you, Aung San Suu Kyi, who, by the way, is not frail, nor a bird-like creature, is a strong willed, battle tested, intelligent person who’s only goal, stated privately from before the time she was swept away by the worlds elite to visit Oz, was that she would do anything and everything to keep some semblance of a civilian government in place as long as she could could so that over the the following several years, perhaps the civilian government would take root. After that, what more could she possibly do. She acknowledged that she would deceived, misunderstood, accused, attacked, and blamed – but, Suu Kyi concluded, “This is the nature of politics.”. I doubt she needs anyone’s hindsight or sympathy.

Third, Hillary Clinton had absolutely ZERO to do with Aung San Suu Kyi and her ascent to the position of State Counselor. I can only assume you mention Clinton in the manner that you have is that you believe Clinton had any influence at all in Burma – she did not. Most Burmese liked Clinton, both of them, only due to western propaganda beaming in happy horseshit via CNN, VOA, BBC – and more of the “Skyfull of Lies” the western media is said to have been according to the dictatorship. Actually, John McCain had more influence than Clinton. I did meet John McCain and I liked him even though as a Senator I though he was one of the biggest smoke and mirrors (and corrupt) politicians from the baby-boom generation. At least, unlike Hillary Clinton, he had charisma.

When Clinton visited the US. Embassy in 2011 I refused to go to see her, or more accurately, to go wait for her. She was about seven hours late yet, the many Clinton fans in the foreign service stood like zombies waddling from right foot to left and back for the chance to see and hear the author of, “We came. We saw. He died.” Hillary arrived, more like slithered, I heard, into the embassy lunch area and got up on a pedestal and promptly snored through some trivial spit soaked ramblings of an old lady tired from traveling around Asia.

And, obviously China will have great influence in Myanmar. Look at a map and see why China is interested more in Myanmar than it is in Mexico. Let’s not go down the road as if China was doing something nefarious by using, or making deals, with Myanmar.

That brings us to the real issue. In Burma, there are Muslims all over the country. Only in Rakhine state are there any problems with Muslims. The Muslims in Burma have no distinct cultural characteristics, they all speak Burmese (except for the Muslims in Rakhine State). And, only in Rakhine State do any of the Burmese Muslims speak Bengali and Arabic.

The name “Rohingya” has no history except that in the 1800’s a Bengali man spoke the word “rooinga” to a British ethnologist (who by the way, said the Muslims in Rakhine State are not indigenous of the region they inhabit nor are they any different from Muslims elsewhere in Burma) as away to describe the name of the place where they lived. In other words, his use of the word “rooinga” was to describe the region named Arakan. Yes, a man from a remote region of the world, with probably no education, nor a concept of history or an organized culture that had no language until 2009, called himself, or the region from which he lived, Arakan, using the word “rooinga” to say “arakan”.

That leads to the mention of the Rohingya language. It was devised as a political tool and used to lend form credence to the idea that Rohingya are an ancient indigenous culture from Rakhine State. They are not. The language, made up within the last ten years, uses mostly Arabic, then Bengali, then Burmese. But, it’s mostly all Arabic.

On the other hand, there are many villages of Burmese Muslims who repelled the influence of the hundreds, if not thousands, of Arabic speaking Imams and their guards (enforcers) who immigrated to
Norther Rakhine state. The Burmese Muslim villages that repelled the Arabic speaking foreigners were not destroyed, nor deemed a threat by the Myanmar army. They still thrive in Rakhine State and they are not interned or held captive. They pose no risk to local Buddhist and in fact, they are often attacked, murdered, women raped, by the extremist Islamist’s seeking to take over Northern Rakhine in order to make it an autonomous region, simply put, a new Islamic State and a new step toward creating a land bridge from South Asia to Malaysia and East Asia.

The Rohingya are not a passive peace living group of people. Fifteen years ago most of northern Rakhine State comprised of Rakhine Buddhist villages. Today, about five percent of the real indigenous people of Arakan, called Rakhine, also called Rakhine Buddhists, remain. The Muslims, who developed a keen sense of utility for using the name Rohingya politically to gain sympathy from human rights organizations such as Fortify Rights, Amnesty, and others, along with a U.N. Security Council lead by and made up of Arabic nations led by Saudi Arabia, have expanded their territorial dominance by using intimidation and violence to move out the Rakhine Buddhist. They also clear out the Christian and Hindu minorities in the region by killing and raping. This is the real Rohingya.

The conflict in Rakhine State is due to the Saudi Arabian funding of madrasa and mosques in Bangladesh to the tune of more than 600 million dollars. The terrorist group, ARSA, who claims the mantle of leadership over the displace Rohingya, has a leader, Atta Ullah, who was born in Pakistan and educated at madrassa’s in Saudi Arabia. The main goal of ARSA ? To create an autonomous Islamic State in Northern Rakhine State in Myanmar.

That’s what the conflict in Rakhine State, Myanmar is about. The expansion of extreme Islamic terrorism – what country on earth would sit by and allow a million or more of people living within its borders to break away and create a fundamentally violent religious state within its borders? Go ahead, name one.

Yes, the Myanmar army probably committed atrocities. They have in every conflict they fought inside Myanmar. But, no where close to the scale of genocide no taking place in Yemen, or Syria. Or, what has taken place in Iraq and Libya. So why the vitriol against Aung San Suu Kyi? She long ago stated her position with the Rohingya, explained what happened and explained she is doing all she can to fix the problem. But, the worlds elite don’t want to know the truth. They just want to shit down on someone until it’s time for dinner and drinks. Journo’s go apoplectic and border demonic mental flagellation such as the way George Monbiot of the Guardian held a public mental breakdown during his screed against Aung San Suu Kyi.

So, that’s an overview of the truth which, unfortunately, is twisted so often there’s almost no point in saying the word “truth”. As for Rohingya, everything about the word is a lie.

Lastly, the Myanmar military could care less about sanctions, tribunals, and accusations of crimes against humanity. If all of the world were held to the same account by the standard of the West’s elite there would be no one left in the United States to wage war. Pivot that.

We have to look at things in their present perspective. Mr. Keverich’s view is more accurate based on where we are and who is backing calls for intervention. It is all more backing of the jihadi element to contain China, and supporting outside intervention will lead to another failed state. The yankee imperium is the greatest enemy of stability and civilization now going and they always support the most backward or corrupt elements.

First, driving past roadblocks, while at times unsettling, was not as dangerous as Eric leads one to believe. If one was almost getting arrested, then one had no business on the roads passing by roadblocks. My guess is that Eric was more unnerved with the roadblock than he was ever in danger of arrest. However, it’s a nice touch and adds some urgency to the article. Still, in 1996 it must have been very weird to be in Rangoon. Cudo’s to you Eric. Now if you’re interested in some truth in Burma, contact me about Christopher Gunnes’s stories from 1988 on the rape of women at the hands of police that helped to ignite the uprising called, “8.8.88”.

Second, I’d met Suu Kyi at least seven times from the day she was released from House Arrest to the onslaught of the world’s elitists who showered her with awards, prizes, money, trophies, plaques, keys to cities, and all other manner of ways to court the planets last non-violent, mythical giant on par with Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, or Mother Theresa. I fact, I got to know her well during that time and I can assure you, Aung San Suu Kyi, who, by the way, is not frail, nor a bird-like creature, is a strong willed, battle tested, intelligent person who’s only goal, stated privately from before the time she was swept away by the worlds elite to visit Oz, was that she would do anything and everything to keep some semblance of a civilian government in place as long as she could could so that over the the following several years, perhaps the civilian government would take root. After that, what more could she possibly do. She acknowledged that she would deceived, misunderstood, accused, attacked, and blamed – but, Suu Kyi concluded, “This is the nature of politics.”

Third, Hillary Clinton had absolutely ZERO to do with Aung San Suu Kyi and her ascent to the position of State Counselor. I can only assume you mention Clinton in the manner that you have is that you believe Clinton had any influence in Burma – she did not. Most Burmese liked Clinton, both of them, only due to western propaganda beaming in happy horseshit via CNN, VOA, BBC – and more of the “Skyfull of Lies” the western media is said to have been according to the dictatorship. Actually, John McCain had more influence than Clinton. I did meet John McCain and I liked him even though as a Senator I thought he was one of the best smoke and mirrors (and corrupt) politicians from the baby-boom generation. At least, unlike Hillary Clinton, he had charm and charisma.

When Clinton visited the US. Embassy in 2011 I refused to go to see her, or more accurately, to go wait for her. I was not an embassy worker, nor a government worker, but I was invited to see Hillary and quietly declined. If word got out that I despised the Clintons my head would have been lopped off by the social justice warriors – which was just about every young Brit and American in Burma at the time. Hillary was about seven hours late. The many Clinton fans (mostly government workers and private school teachers) stood like zombies waddling from right foot to left and back for the chance to see and hear the author of, “We came. We saw. He died.” Hillary arrived, more like slithered, I heard, into the embassy lunch area and got up on a pedestal and promptly snored through some trivial spit soaked ramblings of an old lady tired from traveling around Asia.

Without getting to deep on the matter, China will obviously have great influence in Myanmar. Look at a map and see why China is interested more in Myanmar than it is in Mexico. Let’s not go down the road, as if China was doing something nefarious by using, or making deals, with Myanmar.

That brings us to the real issue. In Burma, there are Muslims all over Burma. Only in Rakhine state are there any problems with Muslims. The Muslims in Burma have no distinct cultural characteristics, they all speak Burmese (except for the Muslims in Rakhine State). And, only in Rakhine State do all of the Burmese Muslims speak Bengali and Arabic.

The name “Rohingya” has no history except that in the 1800’s a Bengali man spoke the word “rooinga” to a British ethnologist (who by the way, said the Muslims in Rakhine State are not indigenous of the region they inhabit nor are they any different from Muslims elsewhere in Burma) as a way to describe the name of the place where they lived. In other words, his use of the word “rooinga” was to describe the region named Arakan. Yes, a man from a remote region of the world, with probably no education, nor a concept of history or a culture (his own) that had no recorded language until 2009, called himself, or the region from which he lived, Arakan, using the word “rooinga” to say “arakan”. The Rohingya lobby has made up a language to use as a tool to try to gain independence from Myanmar.

That leads to the mention of the Rohingya language. It was devised as a political tool and used to give credence to the idea that Rohingya are an ancient indigenous culture from Rakhine State. They are not. The language, made up within the last ten years, uses mostly Arabic, then Bengali, then Burmese. But, it’s mostly all Arabic.

On the other hand, there are many villages of Burmese Muslims who repelled the influence of the hundreds, if not thousands, of Arabic speaking Imams and their guards (enforcers) who immigrated to
Norther Rakhine State. The Burmese Muslim villages that repelled the Arabic speaking foreigners were not destroyed, nor deemed a threat by the Myanmar army. They still thrive in Rakhine State and they are not interned or held captive. They pose no risk to local Buddhist and in fact, they are often attacked, murdered, women raped, by the extremist Islamist’s seeking to take over Northern Rakhine in order to make it an autonomous region, simply put, a new Islamic State and a new step toward creating a land bridge from South Asia to Malaysia and East Asia.

There is a problem in the refugee camps in which extremest ARSA terrorists assassinate any man or woman who dares speak of independence from ARSA or who speaks to outsiders, aid workers, journalists, and Bangladeshi officials.

The so-called Rohingya have been raiding villages of non-Muslim and non-cooperating Muslims, attacking and raping women and children,murdering boys and men, since before 2012. The ARSA terrorists, and the Muslims in Bangladesh, have been killing and ethnically cleansing in Rakhine State for far too long. When ARSA got to the size of hundreds, into the thousands of terrorist fighters, they overreached with multiple attacks on civilian villagers and local police. The attacks were planned and carried out by a highly organized terrorist organization with fighters from the middle-east and Malaysia and Indonesia.

To say that the so-called Rohingya were systematically mistreated and abused by the Myanmar military and locals is not a stretch. Nor is it a stretch to say that the so-called Rohingya hate the Buddhist, Christians, Hindus and non-cooperating Burmese-Muslims. The ARSA Rohingya have been at war with non-Muslims all over the region for decades. Finally, as Myanmar was waking up, it had to make a choice. Let the extremest Muslims take Northern Rakhine and create an Islamic state inside of Myanmar, or move the radicalized Muslims extremists from Myanmar.

The Muslims who I’ve talked with in Rangoon are vociferous and eager to explain that they consider themselves to be Myanmar-Muslim. They have no kind words for the s0-called Rohingya. Don’t take my word for it, go to Yangon and see for yourself.

The Rohingya are not a passive peace loving group of people. Fifteen years ago most of Northern Rakhine State comprised of Rakhine Buddhist villages. Today, about five percent of the real indigenous people of Arakan, called Rakhine, also called Rakhine Buddhists, remain. The Muslims, who developed a keen sense of utility for using the name Rohingya politically to gain sympathy from human rights organizations such as Fortify Rights, Amnesty, and others, along with a U.N. Security Council made up of majority Arabic nations led by Saudi Arabia, have expanded their territorial dominance by using intimidation and violence to move out the Rakhine Buddhist. They also clear out the Christian and Hindu minorities in the region by killing and raping. This is the real Rohingya. Muslims killing infidels.

The conflict in Rakhine State is due to the very recent Saudi Arabian funding of madrasa and mosques in Bangladesh to the tune of more than 600 million dollars. The terrorist group, ARSA, who claims the mantle of leadership over the displaced Rohingya, has a leader, Atta Ullah, who was born in Pakistan and educated at madrassa’s in Saudi Arabia. The main goal of ARSA ? To create an autonomous Islamic State in Northern Rakhine State in Myanmar.

That’s what the conflict in Rakhine State, Myanmar is about. The expansion of extreme Islamic terrorism – what country on earth would sit by and allow a million or more people living within its borders to break away and create a fundamentally violent religious state within its borders? Go ahead, name one.

Yes, the Myanmar army probably committed atrocities. They have in every conflict they fought inside Myanmar. But, they have not come close to the scale of genocide now taking place in Yemen, or Syria. Or, what has taken place in Iraq and Libya. So why the vitriol against Aung San Suu Kyi?

Suu Kyi long ago stated her position with the Rohingya, explained what happened, and explained she is doing all she can to fix the problem. But, the worlds elite don’t want to know the truth. Instead, Journo’s go apoplectic and border on demonic mental flagellation such as the way George Monbiot of the Guardian held a public mental breakdown during his screed against Aung San Suu Kyi.

The Rohingya has a powerful lobby supported by Saudi royals and Amnesty International, Fortify Rights, dozens of journalists working in the region for corporate media, and Zarni Maung, the defacto Rohingya leader who was expelled from University for plagiarizing. Yes, an acclaimed liar is the leader of the Rohingya narrative. Need I say more about that?

So, that’s an overview of the truth which, unfortunately, is twisted so often there’s almost no point in saying the word “truth”. As for Rohingya, everything about the word used by corporate media and institutional organizations such at Oxford University, is a lie.

Lastly, the Myanmar military could care less about sanctions, tribunals, and accusations of crimes against humanity. If all of the world were held to the same account by the standard of the West’s elite there would be no one left in the United States to wage war. Pivot that.

All Islam extremist groups have US/UK backing. I doubt this Rohingya group is any different.

Anyway, the Rohingyas should go to Britain. Didn’t Britain pass a law that says former colony residents who are not given citizenship by their government can get UK citizenship? As I understand it, Indians in HongKong who are not given Chinese passport can apply for UK citizenship. The Rohingyas should have the same rights.

Furthermore, these muslims have burned Buddhist villages, attacked police stations and murdered policemen, and even attacked an army base…I think they are quite lucky that the Burmese army let them escape to the refugee camps….and the Army may yet regret that decision.

Funny how the Rohingya didn’t become a cause for the West until Myanmar signed on to OBOR, not to mention that they are now a cause despite the many criticisms of them that suggests their plight is neither unprovoked nor necessarily unjustified.

Maybe the US and UK et al should spend more time stopping their active support of the perpetrators of known atrocities in Yemen and Syria and less time wringing their hands about the plight of the Rohingya.

The biggest sin of Aung San Suu Kyi is that she doesn’t follow the script the West has laid it out for her. The West original plan is to build her up into a person of ‘moral authority’ in the mold of the a$$hole Tenzin Gyatso (aka the Dalai Lama) to put pressure on China. But turns out after she became part of the Myanmar government and run the country’s foreign policy she didn’t adopt an anti-China stance. Had she done that there won’t be any Rohingya issue in the media.

The government changed it in the 80s. Burmese is the largest ethnic group of the country, but the country has dozens of other groups. It isn’t suitable to use the name of an ethnic group for the country, I guess. Similar to England-Britain. Or Persia – Iran, not all Iranians are Persian. And Myanmar is actually the real old name of the country.

In Thailand it’s possible the Thia never got the memo on the new name, Myanmar.

Oddly, most of the Karen and others fighting the Burmese army in the mountains bordering Thailand hate the Burmese. Yet, they call it Burma in spite of the dictatorship’s name change from Burma to Myanmar.

I use both, most younger, say under 35, use Myanmar. Most above 50 use Burma.

I hear you, but frankly, I think that Suu Kyi is a decent person and a patriot doing the best she can.

The bottom line: the Bangladeshi’s breed like rodents. Please excuse my French, but it’s true. Their massive fertility rate has turned Bangladesh into a literal hell on earth – it makes medieval europe look rich! They are thus a threat to everyone, not because of their religion or skin color etc., but because they exist. Sure, inside ‘Burma’ they are a small number now, but that’s the point: wait until they become a larger number, and you are doomed.

But I don’t blame the Bangladeshis that much. I blame those Western journalists and economists who DEMAND that Malthus was wrong, that people having more children than they can afford to support is GUARANTEED to create wealth – and one asks, but how, exactly? Phrased this way it’s pretty obvious that Malthus was right. So sure, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for some poor Bangladeshi who maybe could take care of one or two or three kids, trying to have seven or eight. But consider that they are being told by all these fake Western Nobel-Prize winners (there is no Nobel Prize in economics, it’s a fake, look it up on wikipedia) and one can perhaps sympathize that they behave the way they do…

Bottom line: we should speak truth. As John Stuart Mills said, people who have more children than they can support are traitors to all who work for a living. If the Bangladeshis don’t want to be hated and driven out, they should stop giving people objectively clear reasons to hate them and drive them out…

Serbs in Kosovo, their ancestral lands, are being murdered with impunity by their “peace loving” Muslim “neighbors”. Serb orthodox churches are being wholesale destroyed by the local Muslims with nary a peep from the hypocrites of the West: as long as Christian human rights are being violated (and worse, of course), it’s OK.

The “president” of the criminal so-called ‘state’ Hashim Thaçi has been reliably implicated in organ trafficking by Council of Europe (no friend of Serbs). (no doubt the organs of murdered Serbs).

The list of crimes by the gang that has been legitimized by the odious West and runs the criminal enclave is long.

Mr. Margolis’ late wife – may she rest in peace – was Bosnian Muslim.
Therefore, naturally, Eric has deep sympathy for Muslims everywhere, and writes frequently about their plight, whether real or contrived. However, Mr. Margolis conveniently forgets the death and destruction visited upon Christian lands and Christian peoples for centuries by Muslim invaders.

That may be the official line. My observation is that in many cases when a country changes its name, it presages a bloodbath or at least an ethnic cleansing:
Russia -> USSR
Cambodia->Kampuchea
D.R. Congo -> Zaire
Rhodesia -> Zimbabwe
Central African Republic -> Central African Empire

My theory is that it’s because official name changes are generally frivolous, expensive, and pointless. Just the sort of thing a dictator or other absolute ruler would do.

By the way, England is just one constituent part of Great Britain.
Persia became Iran in 1935 to imply they were Aryans, due to the current Shah’s admiration for Hitler.

Don’t know much about bloodbath and name changing in Europe, but most Southeast Asia countries has changed their names, Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc. Korea also changed its name, China changed names a few dozen times in history.

As for the former colonies don’t want to keep the name given to them by the colonist, I guess it’s understandable. Were I Filipino, I wouldn’t have wanted my country having a name came from King Philip of Spain.

Yes, the Taiping Rebellion, but that was pretty much a Christian ISIS. It would’ve imploded by itself, and the process was well under way when Hong Xiuquan (the “Heavenly King”) began massacring his own commanders. The decaying Manchu dynasty in any case would have collapsed sooner or later. The Taiping Rebellion just gave it a hard shove in that direction.

(Apart from the millions of Hindus and Sikhs in India and black people in Africa killed by imperialist Christian invaders within the last hundred or so years, and that’s not even mentioning Iraq, Afghanistan, etc)

Older people call it BURMA, but the families and cronies of the dictatorship all call it Myanmar. Most younger people call it Myanmar. People from the norther and eastern border regions, for decades in conflict with the Tatmadaw, call it Burma though they hate the Burmese. Go figure. U.S. policy uses “Burma” and sometime The Lady publicly calls it Burma. Meanwhile, while the political class and activists, and ex-political prisoners call it both – as do I.

Wherever they are Islamists have been killing anyone not Muslim. Buddhists have fought back in defense of their existence in places not yet overtaken by Islamists. Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Southern Thailand. All that stands in the way of having a safe passage via land-bridge from the Middle East to South East Asia is the Ayerwaddy Delta south of Rangoon. Establishing an independent Islamic state leading from Bangladesh into Rakhine State is the Key to keeping Islam from spreading throughout South East Asia.

I first saw this article on Lew Rockwell, which does not allow comments, was glad to see it posted on unz.

Very interested to see how the left turned on Aung San Sun Kyi, which in the recent past regarded her as a saint, now she is the devil incarnate. The left is calling for her Nobel prize to be revoked and the Eli Wiesel award by the US Holocaust museum has been taken from her.

Her so crime is to stand up the interests of the majority in Burma, so she is a nationalist, which the left hates!

If Suu Kyi and Myanmar’s government have taken some action against ethnic Chinese minority in Myanmar I’m sure Western governments would be completely in favor and, even more, offering help in arms and otherwise (like blocking China’s resolution in UN). I’m also absolutely sure we would not hear from Eric Margolis one single word of protest. But fact that Myanmar’s government decided to deal with Islamic terrorism in border area with Bangladesh was enough for his huge disappointment.

And as for Bosnia’s Muslim women he mentioned I would like to ask him to give any reference from credible source for his claim. Muslims claimed 100.000 of their women had been rapped but UN commission after war concluded that 12.000 women of all nations (Muslims, Croats, Serbs) had suffered. Ratio between nations completely matched ethnic composition of Bosnia before war. All sides suffered equally and that was result of unfortunate civil war but I didn’t see Eric Margolis mentioned Croatian or Serbian women. It looks he is sympathetic only towards Muslims.

Of course, most famous case of claim about Muslim women’s in Bosnia being of one who was granted asylum in Switzerland based on her claim she was raped by Serbs. The story was quietly pushed aside after woman gave birth to black child (just info: Serbs are white). She actually had intercourse with one of UN workers in Bosnia who was black or “of color” if you like . Of course, no MSM reported that fact.

“Indians are the most ethnocentric population in the world which is why places like Singapore are right to limit their population.”

Its quite the opposite. With 2 ethnic Indian Deputy Prime Ministers and a strong campaign to make one of them the next Prime Minister of Singapore after the pro US son of Lee Kuan Yew, Lee Hsien Loong steps down in 2 years or so, they have signed treaties with India that effectively allows unconstrain immigration from India.

Thank you Eric Margolis for writing about the persecuted minority. By the government’s own records these people have been living in the area for over a century. What right the government has to treat them as outsiders and throw them out of their own land. I just wonder what kind of hatred has prompted the commentators on this site to side with the Burmese government.

Israel didn’t start with a mighty army, just a few settlers that the mighty Ottoman army could handle easily. But great oaks from little acorns grow. If you look around and see what the other “oak trees” (Muslims in non-Muslim counries) are up to, the phrase “Kill it before it can grow” suggests itself. Here the Burmese are simply expelling an undesirable and potentially, if not actually, a troublesome population., not an unknown phenomenon of the twentieth century; note, just to cite one example, the French population of Algeria.

The number of “radical” Buddhist monks in Myanmar is quite small. However, they make a lot of noise and attract attention because hate and bigotry articles sell better than the thousands of Burmese and other people who donate time, food and money to help the destitute and impoverished all over Myanmar. I know about a dozen monks very well and all of them talk about the pathetic situation for Rakhine Muslims. It’s also a fact they the leading “radical” monk, U Wirithu, was threatened with long term imprisonment if he didn’t accept the offer to get paid well by the military to become a public supporter of military issues. that interfere with transitions towards civilian government. In Rangoon about eight months ago, U Wirithu held a public dhama talk at the Shwe Dagon Pagoda. More detractors showed up and razzed Wirithu, yelled and laughed at him. But….somehow that never a made corporate news mention. NOTHING in Myanmar is as it seems. One as to use several mirrors on each issue to get a hint of authenticity on each one. And even then, Burma is a mystery.

During WWll General Aung San allied with the Japanese invaders as an expedient way to remove the colonial Brits from Burma. Only a brief time passed before General Aung San made a deal for Burma’s independence from British colonialism and he then turned Burmese fighters on the Japanese.

During the fight against the Japanese, the British plan in Rankine state was to heavily arm and train the Muslim population in Rakhine State so they could fight the Japanese.

Instead, the Rakhine Muslims took the British armaments and training and joined with the Japanese, and went on to raid Rakhine Buddhist villages and slaughtered over 20,000 surprised and defenseless Buddhists, raped hundreds if not thousands of Buddhist women and children, and then took over the burned out villages and claimed them for Islamic settlers from Bangladesh.

In short, the Burmese military will never forget how the Rakhine Muslims refused to learn Burmese, and how they continued their violent expansion across the fertile lands of Arakan (Rakhine State) and how they betrayed Burma.

I don’t care about Eric’s personal life but if he’s swallowed the globalist cool aid/glue about genocide in Burma solely based on his wife’s Muslimocity then maybe I was wrong about him all along. On the other hand, it’s very difficult for journalists to operate in Myanmar and it’s very easy to give up and just get in line and write a piece that is simply reworded from dozens of other anti-Burma Pro-Rohingya.

Eric, (or any other journalist) if you want to come to Burma, spend some time with real people from all sides of the issue (meaning not the same people used by the rest of western and MSM, or the local people with an obvious leaning toward one side or the other, or someone selected by the embassy) I can take you around and help you to sort out the background so you can make some informed opinions.

It’s also settled by your claim that the existence of Muslims go back 100 years that so-called Rohingya are not indigenous to Burma. However, the Muslims have been trading and living in the region fro centuries.

For my life I can’t understand how Western countries join together to murder millions of Muslims in the Middle East while not one opposition peep is made from Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, and Fortify Rights the three main Rohingya supporters and lobbyists regarding the real genocide taking place in Yemen, Syria and Palestine.

You can *Cough* until you are blue in the face, but it won’t change facts.

Islam came ~600 years after Christianity.
There were no Muslims in the Middle East: but now there are hardy any Christians left.
From its birth in the Arabian Peninsula Islam spread like a wildfire, mostly, but not exclusively, by the sword. Christian lands ethnically cleansed by invading Muslim hordes. Christians massacred, ethnically cleansed, forcibly Islamized.

{(Apart from the millions of Hindus and Sikhs in India….}

Muslim invasions of India resulted in the killings of about 80 million Hindus and Sikhs at the hands of Muslim invaders.*Cough*, *Cough*.

Thanks! I’ve been uncomfortable with the Western coverage of Myanmar ever since reading about it in Amy Chua’s *World on Fire* – have you read this? She focuses on China’s domination of Myanmar, and their ethnic repression of the Bamar.

As many ancient Jain and Brahmanical texts speak of persecution at the hands of Indian Buddhists, as Buddhists accuse their South Asian competitors of the same. And consider Jerryson’s examples of the sixth century Chinese Buddhist monk Faqing, who promised his 50,000 followers that every opponent they killed would take them to a higher stage in the bodhisattva’s path. Or recall that with the advent of nationalism, Buddhist monks rallied to the cause as with Japanese Rinzai support for the military campaign against the Russians in 1904-5, or Zen and Pureland Buddhist justifications of the Japanese invasions of China, Korea and Singapore during World War II. Buddhism has been corrupted in these places, they argued, and violence is necessary to insure that ‘true’ Buddhism is restored and preserved. The same rhetoric – of some fundamental Buddhism under threat – also underwrites the more recently nationalized bigotry and violence that Buddhist monks and laypersons have unleashed on non-Buddhists in Thailand, Sri Lanka, Bhutan and, last but not least, Myanmar.

Academia is in fact rife with examples of scholarship that touts the tolerance and inclusiveness of Buddhists and the general argument is nothing new. According to Thomas A. Tweed, Professor of History at Notre Dame University, increasing awareness of religious diversity due to colonial expansion and Christian missionizing led Euro-American Enlightenment intellectuals repelled by Christian sectarianism to consider Buddhism to fit the bill of the “natural religion” (or “perennial philosophy”) they sought, one that exuded “tolerance” toward people of different faiths and was amenable to scientific progress. So convinced were they that some, such as the nineteenth century German-American scholar Paul Carus, even chastised Asian Buddhists when they launched polemical assaults on Christian missionaries, accusing the Asians of using language the “Buddha certainly would not…” So was born the pervasive myth, characteristically articulated by the early twentieth century Swedish-American Theosophist Herman Vetterling, that Buddhism is “a religion of noble tolerance, of universal brotherhood, of righteousness and justice,” and that in its growth as the religion of a global community it had not “caused the spilling of a drop of blood.”
Associate Professor of Religious Studies, Michael Jerryson, picks up where Tweed signs off to show that the tendency to associate Buddhism with tolerance did not die in the early twentieth century or remain bound in an ivory tower. In the wake of World War II, it found its way into the writings of Jack Kerouac and Allen Ginsberg, marching further forward in time with such works as Robert Pirsig’s Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance, and by the 1980s assumed political dimensions in the form of the Free Tibet Movement. And finally, who can forget (even if you want to) Keanu Reeves in Bernardo Bertolucci’s Little Buddha.

Comment #4 was an excellent balanced and objective rejoinder to Eric’s highly partisan and propadandistic account of events in Burma. In his view Muslims are always the victims. Always. I don’t believe he’s ever bemoaned the Muslim eradication of ancient Christian communities in Iraq that predate Islam.

The MSM, NGO’s and U.S. State Dept. are dusting off the template from Bosnia in the early 90’s and painting the Muslims as innocent victims of religious intolerance when in fact the Bosnian Serbs were fighting back against Muslim aggression and persecution and winning much to the consternation of Western liberals.

One of the problem of Sri Lankan Buddhism is close association with nationalism . Tamils were killed for a reason that could easily be applied to USA or Canada to drive immigrants out . It is worse in Mynamar who incorporated large chunks of Bemgali speaking areas of NE Indian land.

It is like USA demanding that Spsnish of Peurto Rico be deported to Carrubean .

Future war will settle this.

Myanmar is busy also in 20+ other fights against other ethnic groups .

The crusades ended 727 years ago, cough man. Entirely different time and context. How far back in history would you like to go back, Obama?

Atrocities committed by crusaders pale in comparison to the atrocities against Persians, Greeks and others that Jews boast about in the old testament or the Mongols who murdered approximately one million Muslims in their siege of Baghdad in 1258.

But since those atrocities weren’t committed by white Europeans lefty loons flush these down the memory hole.

And….the purpose of organizing the Crusades in the first place was to liberate Christian lands and holy places from Muslim invaders who had taken over those lands.

Muslim apologists conveniently forget to mention that when they bring up the Crusades.
As if crusaders had invaded Muslims lands.
But of course for Muslims any conquered lands ethnically cleansed* of indigenous Christian peoples or other faiths become ……”Muslim lands” (sic).
__________
* …..Christians massacred, forced out, forcibly converted to Islam, parents murdered and their children abducted to be raised as Muslims,sold to harems or slavery, etc,etc. And finally if all the above did not work as the invaders hoped – commit Genocide of Christian peoples (e.g. of Christian Armenians, Assyrians, and Pontic Greeks in Asia Minor at the hands of invading (from East and Central Asia) nomad Muslim Turks and their Muslims helpers.

For pinpoint examples of Tibet’s warring history one should turn to Derek F. Maher’s “Sacralized Warfare: The Fifth Dalai Lama and the Discourse of Religious Violence” (77-90),
2 One of the most prominent advocates for Buddhist involvement in the war was the Venerable Juzan, who insisted that Śākyamuni Buddha was himself a nationalist and that, based on certain doctrines of the Yogācāra school, killing was permissible or even advisable if one could thereby liberate beings from saṃsāra (141-42).
Journal of Buddhist Ethics ISSN 1076-9005 http://www.buddhistethics.org/ Volume 18, 2011

Sinhala army song from 1999 said to be composed by a Buddhist monk contained the following verse: “Linked by love of the [Buddhist] religion and protected by the Motherland, brave soldiers you should go hand in hand.”

lest we forget that Muslima women are forbidden to marry a non-Muslim…. on pain of death

The Rakhine are indigenous to Rakhine State. By the way, they’d love to be independent again. It’s only been a blink of the (historical) eye since the ethnic-Burmese from Yangon, colonized the Rakhine Kingdom

The Rohingya girls do run attractive, and they are financially low maintenance. Plus, half of them are lighter-skinned than Saudi girls. Saudi had to FORBID its sons to import a Rohingya bride, because the phenomenon was on the verge of initiating a sub-population of Saudi spinsters.

Socially, that’s bad news in a country still under the control of tribal people. Not being reliably able to marry off a daughter, would create social discontent. Monarchs get nervous when their subjects have gripes that cannot be wiped away with money

Buddhist Burmese is at war with few other ethnic groups . Rakhine which was part of Assam and was wrested by Burma before British again brought it under commonwealth of India.
Muslims Hindus and tradition al believers of the Assam-North east india, found themselves at the receiving g end of the Buddha fanaticism after 1948 when Britain left .

If there were a Christian country to north and east of Burma, the Burmese murderers with begging bowls would have used the lies they are using against Rohingya. The Burma need to be broken into different regions and countries . Only the force will convince the begging bowl hugging monkeys and that fate is staring at them like a laughing Buddha. Rohingyan can’t but the Christian will .

And….the purpose of organizing the Crusades in the first place was to liberate Christian lands and holy places from Muslim invaders who had taken over those lands.

Yes and to protect Christians making a pilgrimmage to Jerusalem who were at times being harassed, robbed and/or forced to pay high tolls and in a few cased, killed, by Muslims although some historians seem to differ on the degree and severity of the depredations. So the crusades were not a case of naked aggression by fair skinned Europeans against innocent, mostly brown skinned Muslims but that’s the simplistic yarn the left and some disingenuous Muslims like to spin.

Christians ( Christuuu) came to liberate land – Chrstiuuu from Italy France and from Armenian holy city built and lost by pagan , and god knows where else from – but they came hundred years after to take revenge grab land and turn the place into rivers of blood
Christuuu love this part ‘ that land was our It now belonged to me I read bible It’s in Pauls letter to Pauls step sister.. … blah blah blah ”

Taking that cue Jewish came back on the back of Bible thumper , Paul loving crusade loving stupid Christuuu .

Then came bearded real authentic stupid to America but not to take land but just make America stop Iraq’s and Palestini’s woes .

— rest of your argument about Muslim converting Christuuuuu by force do not deserve a reply
It is BS.

No , that’s not the reason, Reasons are the followings – he is a decent human being and he knows the history both of different depths -WikiLeaks and more profound scholastic uuinversity level materials

The usage of the term Rohingya has been historically documented prior to the British Raj. In 1799, Francis Buchanan-Hamilton wrote an article called “A Comparative Vocabulary of Some of the Languages Spoken in the Burma Empire”, which was found and republished by Michael Charney in the SOAS Bulletin of Burma Research in 2003.[74][75][76] Among the native groups of Arakan, he wrote are the: “Mohammedans, who have long settled in Arakan, and who call themselves Rooinga, or natives of Arakan.”[74] The Classical Journal of 1811 identified “Rooinga” as one of the languages spoken in the “Burmah Empire”. In 1815, Johann Severin Vater listed “Ruinga” as an ethnic group with a distinct language in a compendium of languages published in German.[77]
In 1936, when Burma was still under British rule, the “Rohingya Jam’iyyat al Ulama” was founded in Arakan.[78][79][note 1]
According to Jacques Leider, the Rohingya were referred to as “Chittagonians” during the British colonial period, and it was not controversial to refer to them as “Bengalis” until 1990s.[82] Leider also states that “there is no international consensus” on the use of the term Rohingya, as they are often called “Rohingya Muslims”, “Muslim Arakanese” and “Burmese Muslims”.[83][note 2] Others, such as anthropologist Christina Fink, use Rohingya not as an ethnic identifier but as a political one.[84] Leider believes the Rohingya is a political movement that started in the 1950s to create “an autonomous Muslim zone” in Rakhine.[85]
The government of Prime Minister U Nu, when Burma was a democracy from 1948–1962, used the term “Rohingya”.[86] When the Mayu Frontier District was created covering Rohingya-majority areas, the term “Rohingya” was recognized by the Burmese government. The term was broadcast on Burmese radio and was used in the speeches of Burmese rulers.[49] A UNHCR report on refugees caused by Operation King Dragon referred to the victims as “Bengali Muslims (called Rohingyas)”.[87] Nevertheless, the term Rohingya wasn’t widely used until the 1990s.[86][87][88]

Not really fair to call it a Christian ISIS. Whatever you may think of it, ISIS has a quite credible claim to being much closer to the original Islamic tradition than other variants of the religion.

The Taipings were just weird, more like a Jim Jones cult that anything legitimately Christian. Once they actually understood who they were, no Christian group acknowledged them as brothers in the faith.

BS like the BS of Avery , mimicking his falsehood. In 1858 Hindus came to Mughal Muslim Bahdur Shah and told him to lead the fight against Christian East India Company and he did.The Hindus could not agree who would lead the fight .They asked Muslim to do .

In May 1946, Muslim leaders from Arakan, Burma (present-day Rakhine State, Myanmar) met with Muhammad Ali Jinnah, the founder of Pakistan, and asked for the formal annexation of two townships in the Mayu region, Buthidaung and Maungdaw, by East Pakistan (present-day Bangladesh). Two months later, the North Arakan Muslim League was founded in Akyab (present-day Sittwe, capital of Rakhine State), which also asked Jinnah to annex the region.

Local mujahideen were subsequently formed against the Burmese government, and began targeting government soldiers stationed in the area. Led by Mir Kassem, the newly formed mujahideen movement began gaining territory, driving out local Rakhine communities from their villages, some of whom fled to East Pakistan

this proves again Muslims have been living in Burma They are not new comer. Trouble? Is Basque causing trouble? Scotland causing ? Western Sahara causing ? Is Donbass causing ? Is white Russian causing when they ask for annexation of Kazakhistan to Russia?

You dnt kick them out to solve the problem of secession /separation.

Again not a good argument . Not good as Trump would say -bad very bad.

Western Civilization expelled the Muhammadans 500 years ago. A few traitorous, God-Damned Globalist Morons such as: Angela Merkel, Barack Obama, France, Canada & George W. Bush let some Muhammadans re-enter Western Civilization. The Muhammadans are as bad now as they have ever been. Exclusion was a failed half-measure.

In the Sepoy Mutiny of 1857 (not 1858) the mutineers of the Bengal Army put the Mughal Emperor nominally in charge because he was the only native potentate that in theory had any authority over the entire country. Also, almost no other important native princes joined in the revolt.

“The Hindus” did not beg Zafar to take command. He was raised by the Bengal Army mutineers. The infantry was mostly Hindu, but the cavalry was mostly Muslim.

There is evidence that as the revolt wore on, it tended to become more a Muslim fight to protect their religion and dominant place in Indian society. Don’t have the expertise to judge whether this author is accurate in his description of the process.

“Nor is there any memorial to the massacres of the Raj, from Delhi in 1857 to Amritsar in 1919, the deaths of 35 million Indians in totally unnecessary famines caused by British policy,” he added.(

“Churchill has as much blood on his hands as Hitler does. Particularly the decisions that he personally signed off during the Bengal Famine when 4.3 million people died because of the decisions he took or endorsed.” — Dr Shashi Tharoor,

Pop~lationof BritishIndia.-The population of Bengal was generally calculated at 30 rnillions ; that of Nor- thern India under British Rule at 30 millions; that of Madras about 1 4 millions ; and of Bombay about 3 millions. Total for British India, 77 millions.

Use of multiple, non-Anonymous handles for commenting on this webzine is strongly discouraged, and your secret (real or fictitious) email allows you to authenticate your commenter-identity, preventing others from assuming it, accidentally or otherwise.

Therefore, keeping your Name+Email combination is important, and the 'Remember' feature saves it for you as a cookie on your device/browser.

Also, activating the 'Remember' feature enables the Agree/Disagree/Thanks/LOL/Troll buttons on all comments.

Email Replies to my Comment

Body of Comment

Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter

Zhukov gave a great deal of credit to US supplies. The British and US tanks were not fit for combat but were used for training. There were other US supplies that were extremely useful particularly trucks. I remember other references to radio communications between ground attack planes and those d...

Armchair historians can look back on wars and battles with an intellectual distance, to judge victories, but for many of the soldiers who fought and for many families who incurred loses, it just seemed a senseless waste. One of my uncles died in the war. Another was wounded. My grandparents, u...

For once, I can’t completely agree with Eric Margolis, for whom I have enormous respect. Measured in the number of combatants and dead, he’s absolutely right that the Soviet Union did the heavy lifting in defeating nazi Germany. But that’s far more the only crucial metric. sending an infa...

The real issue was why side with Russia against Germany? Let these two fight it out alone. This sensible strategy was ruined by the insane pledge to Poland. The most idiotic thing the British ever did. Without the pledge which turned Hitler west, WW2 would have been just a Russo-German war.

The ultimate assessment of Allied bombing is impossible to make.
It sounds to me like you are trying to walk a tight rope with that one. I assume you are saying that it's impossible to say with any mathematical certainty how much allied bombing slowed the German war machine. Not that it had ...